Short Circuit 171 | Should Originalists Party Like It’s 1868, not 1791?
On a special Short Circuit, professors Christopher Green and Evan Bernick join your host Anthony Sanders to examine one of the great questions of the Fourteenth Amendment: When courts apply the Bill of Rights to the States, should they give those provisions the meaning they had when they were adopted, in 1791, or how they were understood when the Fourteenth Amendment was adopted, in 1868? The question is important, argue our guests, both methodologically and practically. Among other things, using the meaning the Bill of Rights had in 1868 might better fulfill the promise of Reconstruction, which was largely lost when the Supreme Court buried much of the Fourteenth Amendment in the years following the Civil War.
And speaking of Reconstruction, click here to see our 150th anniversary celebration of Section 1983, that we held earlier this week! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MlrAK4OXvPQ
Torres v. Madrid, https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/19-292_21p3.pdf
McDonald v. City of Chicago, https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/09pdf/08-1521.pdf
Graham v. Connor, https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/490/386/
Ramos v. Louisiana, https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/19pdf/18-5924_n6io.pdf
Christopher Green, https://law.olemiss.edu/faculty-directory/christopher-green/
Evan Bernick, https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/cf_dev/AbsByAuth.cfm?per_id=2547295
Anthony Sanders, https://ij.org/staff/asanders/
Want to email us? [email protected]